D&D (2024) Monster Manual Organisation

Not to pick on you on particular, just riffing off of this particularly pithy statement of the issue.

I do see the logic at play here: they have grouped together Monsters when they will either be in a group encounter (various Goblins) or you would want one that is CR appropriate for the party (different Tiers of Fungus), rather than world building groupings (Vrocks being under D for Demon).

I am fairly agnostic on the issue, but I do see the logic at play, and how it will work in prep.
Yes, I should have qualified my statement that: It doesn't make sense to me for how I want to use the book.

Also, for me the two items that followed in my comment (lore and stat block related) are big parts of the reason that it didn't makes "sense" to me. I could see some logic from a simple organization issue, but as an overall usage issue, again for me, it doesn't make sense.

There are things I like about this MM, and it is better then the 2014, but I admit I was disappointed after I skimmed through it the first time and that was mostly because of the organization issues I noted in my comment.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

you would want one that is CR appropriate for the party (different Tiers of Fungus), rather than world building groupings (Vrocks being under D for Demon).
I don't know about that division. If I wanted to make a demon summoner encounter that is CR appropriate for the party I think I would rather have the demons together to skim through rather than looking up the scattered ones individually.
 

Do you want a horror story?
Go look up the Blue Slaad in the new Monster Manual (2025).

Where do you look? If you're like me - an old school D&D player - you look under Slaad. (Or Salad, because we still make that joke and it's still funny!)

And that's where it is. Great.

Now you look up the Blue Dragon. So, you turn to Dragon and... huh. No dragons. It's a game called Dungeons & Dragons and it doesn't have dragons!

Once you've finished hyperventilating, you look under "B" for Blue and... there's the Blue Dragons and all its variants.

Cultists are grouped together.
  • Cultist
  • Cultist Fanatic
  • Cultist Hierophant
  • Aberrant Cultist
  • Death Cultist
  • Elemental Cultist
  • Fiend Cultist

Yugoloths are spread throughout the book, much like demons and devils. And, as a result, have no text explaining what a yugoloth, demon or devil is.

Back to the Blue Dragon. Here are the entries:
  • Blue Dragon Wyrmling
  • Young Blue Dragon
  • Adult Blue Dragon
  • Ancient Blue Dragon

And here are the Faerie Dragons:
  • Faerie Dragon Adult
  • Faerie Dragon Youth
That's a little inconsistent.

And then there's the renaming of monsters. We now have the "Animated Rug of Smothering". I'm not a fan, but at least they all go together under "Animated Objects".

Animated Objects
  • Animated Armor
  • Animated Broom
  • Animated Flying Sword
  • Animated Rug of Smothering

Oh, look they've done something similar for Fungi!

Fungi
  • Gas Spore Fungus
  • Shrieker Fungus
  • Violet Fungus
  • Violet Fungus Necrohulk

Sigh. I can see what they're trying for, but this is entirely the opposite of what they've down with the dragons. Why are they grouping fungi together in the first place? Is there special Fungal lore or mechanical similarities we need to know?

"Deadly Spores and Predatory Polyps
Habitat: Underdark; Treasure: None
The dank, sunless Underdark is a fertile breeding ground for weird and dangerous fungi."

Nope, that's the entire text they have in the general Fungi section.

At least the Slaadi get a nice section explaining what they are. (Something the Yugoloths really wanted).

One of the troubles that the Arcanaloth has is that - if you're not familiar with D&D lore - you don't realise that it is a Yugoloth. So, I understand entirely the motivation behind putting it in alphabetical order. But then the book is completely inconsistent in how it handles everything else. You're meant to realise that "Fungus" is the key word for the fungi to say it's in a section together, while "Blue Dragon" is the keyword for the Young Blue Dragon (and not Dragon), but Blue Slaad is a Slaad not a Blue...

Elementals? Oh they're separated into "Air", "Earth", "Fire", "Water" not grouped together under Elemental.

Animals are all together in an appendix. (Though some aren't actually beasts, they're celestial or monstrosities and just look like animals). I sort of expected NPCs to have an appendix as well, but no - they're in the main text of the book, lurking.

If they'd gone full alphabetical, I could at least understand it. It's this half-hearted confusing mess that really irritates me. Especially when useful group information disappears because they decided that monsters needed to be ungrouped.

Argh!
At least Genies are in one place like Mephits…. Oh… oh wait. ;)

Thank you for doing all that looking up and reporting back Merric!
 

I don't know about that division. If I wanted to make a demon summoner encounter that is CR appropriate for the party I think I would rather have the demons together to skim through rather than looking up the scattered ones individually.
Maybe, ut then the Demons are listed by type in the index, and you can cross reference it by CR in the other index. I am fairly indifferent, a physical book will always have some idiosyncrasies of organization compared to a searchable hyperlinked database.
 


Yeah I can understand going one way or another, but the idea that they did this "half-way" approach is just the worst of all worlds.

That said, while I can respect the idea of "oh an erinyes....never heard of that let me look that up....oh its not under Es...."

but at the same time I think its far more likely for a new dm to go, "ok I need like some kind of demon for this fight, let me go to demons....oh there is no demon section....so ok I need a demon....um, demon demon demon....hmmm not sure where to find one"

In other words, I think grouping up monsters is the best model to me, both for existing and new dms.
 

but at the same time I think its far more likely for a new dm to go, "ok I need like some kind of demon for this fight, let me go to demons....oh there is no demon section....so ok I need a demon....um, demon demon demon....hmmm not sure where to find one"
However, that ia pretty clearly laid out in the Index by Family.
 

The OP is a fair critique. We can see there are conflicting dilemmas about how to organize the entries.


Personally I would like to see the following entries. Like a scientific name, there is an effort to be consistent. The name of the creature is "Dragon Copper", where "Dragon" is functioning adjectively. Of course there are other ways to organize Dragons, but this would, by far, be easiest from me to find things. For Humanoid, I would rather look for this entry than "Professional".


Dragon Black
Dragon Blue
Dragon Brass
Dragon Bronze
Dragon Copper
Dragon Faerie
Dragon Gold
Dragon Green
Dragon Red
Dragon Silver
Dragon Shadow
Dragon White

Elemental Air
Elemental Earth
Elemental Fire
Elemental Water

Fungal Gas Spore
Fungal Necrohulk
Fungal Shrieker
Fungal Violet

Genie Dao
Genie Djinn
Genie Efreeti
Genie Marid

Humanoid Assassin
Humanoid Bandit
Humanoid Bandit Captain
Humanoid Bandit Crimelord
Humanoid Bandit Deceiver
Humanoid Berserker
Humanoid Berserker Commander
Humanoid Commoner
Humanoid Cultist
Humanoid Cultist Aberrant
Humanoid Cultist Deather
Humanoid Cultist Elementist
Humanoid Cultist Fanatic
Humanoid Cultist Fiender
Humanoid Cultist Hierophant
Humanoid Druid
Humanoid Gladiator
Humanoid Guard
Humanoid Guard Captain
Humanoid Knight
Humanoid Knight Quester
Humanoid Mage
Humanoid Mage Apprentice
Humanoid Mage Archon
Humanoid Noble
Humanoid Noble Prodigy
Humanoid Performer
Humanoid Performer Legend
Humanoid Performer Maestro
Humanoid Pirate
Humanoid Pirate Admiral
Humanoid Pirate Captain
Humanoid Priest
Humanoid Priest Acolyte
Humanoid Priest Archon
Humanoid Scout
Humanoid Scout Captain
Humanoid Spy
Humanoid Spy Master
Humanoid Tough
Humanoid Tough Boss
Humanoid Vampire Familiar
Humanoid Warrior Commander
Humanoid Warrior Infantry
Humanoid Warrior Veteran

Mephit Magma
Mephit Mud
Mephit Smoke
Mephit Steam


And so on, you get the idea.
Yes, but you apparently can organize files correctly, which used to be basic training for entry level folks.

I weep for the future.
 


Perhaps the way to do it would have been to go alphabetical, with a blurb entry for groups like Demons, Dragons, or even Elf. At the bottom of that section, list everyone whose in that category so you can go to the individual entry. You get to see what the group/subtype has in common, and then can go track down the individual entry.

There'd still be some hitches - you probably want to put all the Red Dragon's age categories in one spot, and it doesn't future proof the groups for follow-on books (like more Demons in the follow-up monster book they do).
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top